Search Telecare Aware
Like it? Share it!
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
For Telecare Aware in your own language, click here.
 |
 |
| The gist is...If you have a serious comment to make anonymously...email it, don't just post it. |
Truly anonymous comments - where the writer is unknown - are not published unless they are unexceptional.
Comments or articles where the authorship is known but are offered for publication anonymously are considered on their merits. (Email Steve or Donna in confidence.) There are some circumstances where it is necessary to be close to a particular situation to be able to throw light on it but to write about it publicly would jeopardise the author's position. In that case, the decision to publish an item anonymously hinges on the question of whether or not it is informed opinion that will add insight to, or might start, a debate on a particular topic.
Unsubstantiated allegations of illegal behaviour or substandard products, for example, would not be posted unless they could be independently verified, in which case we would probably publish them ourselves.
Just because a post, article or comment, etc. is published on Telecare Aware readers cannot and should not infer that the editors agree with the author, anonymous or not.
Steve Hards
Donna Cusano
Editors
steve.hards@telecareaware.com
donna.cusano@telecareaware.com
Telecare Soapbox: Philips Lifeline AutoAlert - where's the evidence? |
| Thursday, 11 August 2011 23:25 |
|
Editor Steve frets about the lack of information on the accuracy of the Philips Lifeline AutoAlert and says it's about time they published some data. Back in March 2010, I welcomed the introduction of the Philips Lifeline with AutoAlert (for falls when the person cannot press the pendant button), particularly as a long-needed acknowledgement in the industry that traditional pendant alarms have considerable shortcomings. Philips puts nail in pendant alarm coffin. I also noted that, considering the notorious unreliability of fall detectors, Philips must be anticipating a large number of false positive alerts because there was a 30 second delay built in to enable users to cancel the autoalert. In January this year Philips... linked up in a big deal with WellAWARE Systems to monitor people in 'senior living communities' and 'home health' settings. Philips Lifeline, WellAWARE to co-market. Now I see the following ringing endorsement by The Franciscan Companies, a member of the St. Joseph's Hospital Health Network, complete with an oh-so-confident customer testimonial, on video, in a news item. Auto Alert system detects a fall without the press of a button. It's convincing stuff. Until you ask where the evidence is. And is the equally robust statement on Philips's design news blog to be taken to mean that there are never any false positives or false negatives? "It contains a series of sensors and an advanced algorithm that can accurately depict when the wearer has fallen, sending notification to the Lifeline service." If I were a customer who had a fall that the system failed to report I'd be using that statement in court as a stick to beat them with. Let's be generous and assume that Philips (or now even WellAWARE) has some research data on actual levels of reliability that it has shared with St. Joseph's and other customers. But if it is so good why are they not sharing it with the public at large and the telecare/telehealth community in particular? I can't find that data on any of their sites, and I've not heard of it being presented at any conferences... Alternatively, if the data is not good, then the system and publicity falls into the realm of expensive but false reassurance. Come on, Philips! If you want the industry to take the AutoAlert seriously you have to do better than just making bold assertions! |
